ArticleCurrent eye research2020
Real-world Outcomes among Eyes with Center-Involving Diabetic Macular Edema and Good Visual Acuity.
Article in Current eye research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Factors Influencing Treatment Preference in Patients with Diabetic Macular Edema: A Study Using Conjoint Analysis.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2024Article
- Effect of Adjunctive Intravitreal Conbercept Injection at the End of 25G Vitrectomy on Severe Proliferative Diabetic Retinopathy: 6-Month Outcomes of a Randomised Controlled Trial.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2023Article
- How to Achieve Near-Normal Visual Acuity with Bevacizumab in Diabetic Macular Edema Patients.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeWe aimed to determine long-term visual and anatomical outcomes among patients with center involving-diabetic macular edema and good vision and evaluate factors associated with visual and anatomic outcomes. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn this retrospective study, all patients with type 2 diabetes aged ≥18 years had seen at the Wilmer Eye Institute between March 2015-June 2018 and with diabetic macular edema confirmed on spectral-domain optical coherence tomography imaging were included, provided they had visual acuity of 20/30 or better in ≥1 eye and a follow-up duration of ≥3 clinic visits. Change in logMAR visual acuity and central 1 mm foveal thickness from baseline, lines of visual acuity gained/lost for overall cohort stratified by treatment were analyzed.
resultsAmong 197 (243 eyes) participants, mean (± standard deviation) age was 63.4 ± 11.2 years, and half were males. Average duration of follow-up was 1.7 ± 0.7 years. One hundred and forty-six eyes (60%) received anti-vascular endothelial growth factor injections, at an average of 3.7 ± 2.9 injections/eye/year. Mean logMAR visual acuity at baseline was 0.1 ± 0.1 [Snellen 20/25] in both treatment and observation (no anti-vascular endothelial growth factor treatment received during and 3 months prior to the study inclusion period) groups. Final logMAR visual acuity was 0.2 ± 0.2 in the treatment group [Snellen 20/32] versus 0.1 ± 0.3 in observation group [Snellen 20/25]; (
conclusionsAfter an average of 1.7 years of follow-up, there were no significant differences in final vision or central foveal thickness irrespective of whether patients received or did not receive treatment with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor injections.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.